list_visuals

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

In the absence of annotations, the description fully discloses the API limitation that only dashboard-type visuals are returned and standalone charts are excluded. This is transparent, though it could mention pagination or ordering if applicable.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by a highlighted limitation and usage guidance. It is slightly verbose but every section adds value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity and presence of an output schema, the description covers the main aspects: what is listed, limitations, and alternative tools. It lacks details on default behavior when no filters are provided, but is otherwise complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by stating parameters are optional filters for dataset_id and workspace_id. However, it does not provide constraints like format or behavior when multiple filters are applied.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it lists CDV visuals of type dashboard, with optional filters. It distinguishes from standalone chart visuals created via create_smart_visual and from get_visual, making the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly explains when to use this tool (to list dashboard visuals) and when not to (for standalone chart visuals). It provides clear alternatives: use get_visual and create_dashboard.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.